This is pretty much a rip off of this article, but as always, my added notes and comments.
First, Melodifestivalen. Second, reality shows. Third, talent shows. Fourth, grand movie openings. And fifth, royalism. Actually, now looking at it this isn't a ripoff at all, because I can sum it up in one word - exposure. So I think I'll write about that instead, and ponder why DN lists these particular things. What's even more interesting is that Dagens Nyheter links to YouTube!
What I think the difference really is all about is the general acceptance of the narcissism and the "love me" attitude, for the sole reason that the arenas have grown incredibly. This is in it's turn, due to technology. In 1999 we simply didn't have camera phones and Internet usage wasn't as high as now, nor did we have the speed we now possess. (Yes, I used the word possess just to show that I know how to spell it - what a show off!)
Anyone can be a star in the YouTube age. Commerical arenas aren't more stupid than that they want a piece of that cake too, hence all the endless Idols and copy cats. Then it's the simple spiral effect, it worked for channel blabla, then of course channel ughugh has to do it too, and tada, we have a phenomenon typical of the age we live in.
This personalization continues, screen names and anonymous chats have been replaced by real names and Facebook. We gather those we know closer because we know so many strangers. This is where royalism comes in. What's more familiar than kings and queens? When fifteen minutes of fame has been reduced to fifteen seconds of lame we need something substantial, something we know will last. Royalty and royalism have been around for centuries, it'd be naive to think they're going anywhere, no matter how much we focus on the little person.
We need the contrast between the new and the old, the fast and the slow. And even if the article doesn't say much else, it is an illustration of this.
0 comments:
Post a Comment